ALPHONSO SWAIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant's claim of an involuntary plea due to misinformation about the maximum penalty requires further review.
The defendant pleaded guilty after being told he faced a life sentence if he went to trial, which he claims was inaccurate. He argues this misinformat…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Maximum Penalty cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Alphonso Swain (Swain) appeals the denial of his rale 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the denial of all of Swain’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, except for one issue in which he claims that his plea was involuntary.
Swain argues that his plea was rendered involuntary in that he was misled as to the maximum penalty which might be imposed for the offenses with which he was charged. Specifically, Swain asserts that he was told that he would face a life sentence if he went to trial, when in fact a life sentence was not a possibility for the charges Swain faced. He further alleges that had he known that he was not facing a life sentence, he would have insisted on going to trial instead of pleading guilty.
Because the portions of the record attached to the order denying the motion do not conclusively refute Swain’s allegations on this one issue, we reverse and remand for attachment of portions of the record which do conclusively show that he is entitled to no relief, or, alternatively, for an evidentiary hearing. Gilyard v. State, 675 So. 2d 950 (Fla.lst DCA 1996). We affirm the trial judge’s order in all other respects.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for consistent proceedings.
MINER, MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cutuli v. State, 832 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…nclude that this claim also requires an evidentary hearing: See Wilson v. State, 593 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); see also Parks v. State, 814 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Simpson v. State, 741 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); Swain v. State, 699 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The order denying postconviction relief is reversed in part and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the two grounds discussed above. We affirm the order denying relief as to the other grounds raised in the motion. AFFIRMED…
Authorities Cited
- Silas Gilyard v. State, 675 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)